I'm not sure if you're arguing that it being fictional is an interpretation or that its demise from the ire of the Gods is an interpretation.

If it's the former, you are incorrect. The single best primary source being his own protege and student Aristotle who also makes it clear the whole thing is didactic invention. (There are debates that some individual events within the story are inspired by actual events in Egypt and Athens, but its existence is never presented as fact. The entire idea that this was some historical account came mostly from a judge writing his own history books in the 19th century.)

This is also not debatable due to translation. It's Plato. The best scholars of all time in both language and history have studied this, literally for centuries. There is not any serious or scholarly debate about his intentions with this story. And multiple, equally capable translations of Aristotle corroborate that.

If you're talking about the destruction of Atlantis, it's been too long for me to argue that specifically, but the idea that it was divine punishment is the prevailing view of that story.

Our interpretation of a translation

My brother in Saint Jerome, the best minds in history have been nitpicking Plato's works for centuries. There are libraries filled with commentaries of his works. Of course, they may be all wrong /s

PS: Saint Jerome is the patron of translator.